Conversation
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #287 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 71.42% 71.36% -0.06%
==========================================
Files 84 84
Lines 10334 10358 +24
==========================================
+ Hits 7381 7392 +11
- Misses 2388 2397 +9
- Partials 565 569 +4 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
| } | ||
| } | ||
| // LoadOptions is the functional option type. | ||
| type LoadOption func(*LoadOptions) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe there is no need to change naming, as it is already in load package:
- Options-> LoadOptions
- Option -> LoadOption
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Keep consistent with cpp implementations is better for subsequent maintenance.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As MessagerOptions is also load options only for messager-level. For consistency, should we also rename it to LoadMessagerOptions just like Options renamed to LoadOptions?
- Options-> LoadOptions
- MessagerOptions-> LoadMessagerOptions
A better solution can be considered. C++ or other programming languages can use load namespace:
For example:
namespace load {
struct Options {
...
}
struct MessagerOptions {
...
}
} // namespace load
Field
Modeinload.BaseOptionsis redefined:Mode LoadMode->Mode *LoadModeload.Pathsandload.PatchPathsare removed. Useload.WithMessagerOptionsinstead.load.modeNoneis removed fromload.LoadModeload.LoadMessagerInDirandload.LoadMessagercan accept nil*load.MessagerOptionsnow.